Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Suggesting a new Cav ORBAT

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    The Istar company was discussed at lenght in An Cosantoir in September 2012, detailing sub units and the vehicles attached to them.

    What most of the debate misses is that the Cavalry squadrons are essentially a training units for the deployment of subunits overseas, and the vehicle pool reflects this. The only overseas deployments that exist for Cav are the Cavalry troop for the Recce Company of the infantry battalion ala Chad and Lebanon Mk 3 and the Istar Company ala Nordic and Deutch battalegroup.

    Trying to shoo horn our vehicle requrements into the british doctrine misses the post that (A) we are unlikely to ever deploy a brigade in the field, ((B) that it ignores the way other states such as germany and in particlular france and the US carry out reconnaissance, and are now more influential than British thinking on the matter. What people arte doing is trying to make the british formation reconnaissance squadron as a model without realising that the squadron is designed for reconnaissance in front of an armoured brigade.

    The Americans very kindly publish most of their field manuals online, (just google them) but if you read them you'll see that doctrine in ISTAR Company and the reconnaissiance element of the PSO infantry battalion is now closer to the US army stryker battalions, and the French Concept of GTIA is now more influential for overseas than british doctrine.
    Last edited by paul g; 3 April 2015, 18:54. Reason: crap spelling

    Comment


    • #47
      How many dismounts does the CRV & MRV hold?

      Did I hear 6 and 4 or something like that ?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by DeV View Post
        How many dismounts does the CRV & MRV hold?

        Did I hear 6 and 4 or something like that ?
        Depends on who you heard it from.... #opsec
        For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

        Comment


        • #49
          It was a public source (possibly An Cosantoir), PM if necessary

          Comment


          • #50
            From public sorces (photos and open days)

            The CRV has 6 passenger seats and the MRV has 4.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by DeV View Post
              It was a public source (possibly An Cosantoir), PM if necessary
              Connect June 2014 poster.

              It was the year of fire...the year of destruction...the year we took back what was ours.
              It was the year of rebirth...the year of great sadness...the year of pain...and the year of joy.
              It was a new age...It was the end of history.
              It was the year everything changed.

              Comment


              • #52
                Only 4 x Dismounts in the CRV (+MRV)!! I'm not so crazy after all .

                na grohmití, sorry I have not got back to you on your offer. No I'm not a spy and yes please I would like a look at the ORBAT .
                We travel not for trafficking alone,
                By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
                For lust of knowing what should not be known,
                We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by CTU View Post
                  Many thanks

                  Could have sworn the CRV had more

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    IMHO, recce troops with a 50/50 mix within them of CRVs and MRVs is preferred with a Supp Tp of MRVs and a few LTAV ISRs in HQ troop

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Amidst rising anxieties over Russia, one of the last US combat units still based in Europe, the 2nd Cavalry Regiment, has asked for bigger guns. The House Armed Services Committee is already setting aside money for the urgent upgrade, which the Army staff officially approved yesterday in a memo obtained by Breaking Defense: In brief,…


                      For those that are interested: there is a lot of info on Stryker BCTs out there on the internet. I would recommend the cavalry RSTA (ISTAR) cavalry squadron sections of the literature.

                      Incidentally, the US Stryker BCTs look more an more like someone in Europe read the doctrine an recoined it EUBG. Except

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        The U.S. Stryker RSTA Cav Sqn is equivalent to an Irish Cav Regt, so an Irish Cav Sqn is roughly equivalent to a U.S. Recce Tp.

                        Having looked at the TO&E, we should organise:

                        HQ Tp probably with LTAVs (liaison, sniper & UAV deployment, CBRN recce, etc).
                        Supp Tp with MRV (with FOO/MFC, Javelin capabilities)
                        Recce Tp with CRV (and mix with MRV if funds allow) (with min 84 (if not Javelin) and possibly 60 mortar carried)

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by TangoSierra View Post
                          http://breakingdefense.com/2015/04/t...1efe-408236157

                          For those that are interested: there is a lot of info on Stryker BCTs out there on the internet. I would recommend the cavalry RSTA (ISTAR) cavalry squadron sections of the literature.

                          Incidentally, the US Stryker BCTs look more an more like someone in Europe read the doctrine an recoined it EUBG. Except
                          Except European countires like france had wheeled APC long before the americans, so its actually the other way around. And the Americans were also influenced a bit by soviet doctrine. The Stryker BCT concept comes largely from operations in the balkans from 1991-1999, and in particular the rush for Pristina airport. In fact the british are also looking a bit at soviet doctrine, their army 2020 light infantry company will have two regular infantry platoons, a reserve infantry platoon and a regular machine gun platoon with 6 GMPG, a bit like the 1989 soviet motor rifle company

                          As i said before Its all about overseas, you design your units and buy equipment in accordance with what you want to do. The state doesn't need to have a reconnaissance squadron so that it can locate invaders from the north, or lead a brigade across the border.

                          What it does need is an ISTAR company that can operate overseas in conjunction with other European armies, which it can keep on very high readiness alert for six months once a year. That it does have, and it knows how to organise it as well as i said look at An Cosantoir for September 2012.
                          Last edited by paul g; 28 April 2015, 11:42.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by DeV View Post
                            The U.S. Stryker RSTA Cav Sqn is equivalent to an Irish Cav Regt, so an Irish Cav Sqn is roughly equivalent to a U.S. Recce Tp.
                            And hence maybe that's a point worth focusing on. Does the current split organisation of the DF cavalry (maybe applies to the rest of the DF) fall below critical mass to offer any effective capability. Would amalgamation of both cav units and ACS into one unit offer better efficiencies and opportunities to develop capabilities?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by TangoSierra View Post
                              Would amalgamation of both cav units and ACS into one unit offer better efficiencies and opportunities to develop capabilities?
                              There is a rumour doing the rounds that 1 Mech might be ditching berets in favour of Party Hats...
                              Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by paul g View Post
                                Except European countires like france had wheeled APC long before the americans, so its actually the other way around. And the Americans were also influenced a bit by soviet doctrine. The Stryker BCT concept comes largely from operations in the balkans from 1991-1999, and in particular the rush for Pristina airport. In fact the british are also looking a bit at soviet doctrine, their army 2020 light infantry company will have two regular infantry platoons, a reserve infantry platoon and a regular machine gun platoon with 6 GMPG, a bit like the 1989 soviet motor rifle company

                                As i said before Its all about overseas, you design your units and buy equipment in accordance with what you want to do. The state doesn't need to have a reconnaissance squadron so that it can locate invaders from the north, or lead a brigade across the border.

                                What it does need is an ISTAR company that can operate overseas in conjunction with other European armies, which it can keep on very high readiness alert for six months once a year. That it does have, and it knows how to organise it as well as i said look at An Cosantoir for September 2012.
                                The ISTAR Battlegroup contribution is task org'ed with assets from other corps. AFAIK it doesn't follow the lead unit principle.

                                I would agree to a point, a Cav Sqn should be the lead unit for an ISTAR EUBG contribution with other corps task org'ed in as required.

                                We have and need a DF organised for its primary mission, ie defence of the State, but also available for other roles. And in a light infantry all arms conventional format.

                                So say for example:
                                FHQ / BG HQ- provided by all Corps
                                ISTAR TF HQ - provided by all Corps
                                ISTAR Recce Coy - provided by lead Cav unit (Inf, Arty, Engr assets task org'ed in)
                                ISTAR Logs Coy - provided by all Corps
                                HUMINT Team - provided by all Corps
                                MP element - task org'ed in
                                Movecon element - provided by all Corps

                                Tyvärr kan sidan du försökte nå inte hittas. Det kan bero på att sidan är borttagen eller att adressen i webbläsaren är felstavad. Kontrollera gärna stavningen och försök igen.



                                Originally posted by TangoSierra View Post
                                And hence maybe that's a point worth focusing on. Does the current split organisation of the DF cavalry (maybe applies to the rest of the DF) fall below critical mass to offer any effective capability. Would amalgamation of both cav units and ACS into one unit offer better efficiencies and opportunities to develop capabilities?
                                TBH I'd say get the 2 x Cav Sqns properly manned and equipped and then figure out if we can afford 1ACS - bearing in mind it is supposed to be a Combat asset.

                                The CRVs and MRVs would need to be taken out of 1ACS to supplement a new order being placed.

                                Do you then keep 1ACS?
                                What do you equip them with?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X